I totally agree with your theory Monica. My end of the spectrum is almost the total opposite of your's, with the same theme.

Okay, if you looked at my family life and how I grew up we would have been classified as lower-class because we didn't live in fancy houses. In fact we lived in a few shacks, we didn't have much money and at one point we would have starved, in fact my mother was starving herself so us kids could eat. This was when I was six years old. I didn't know about this until a few years ago and my aunt told me about it. Dad had been out of work for quite a while. Then my parents found out about this new thing called "Food Stamps" (1966) Back then you couldn't spend them in the grocery store, you went to the Army Surplus Store and bought rations. I remember eating these because I hated the powdered eggs. You just add water and scrabble them. To this day I hate scrambled eggs if you add milk to them. There were a few points in my growing up years that we lived in nice houses, but Dad wasn't a very good employee, he didn't like anyone to boss him around and he had a hot temper.

According to general theory lower-classed citizen breed lower-classed citizens and they find themselves in a pit of poverty that they can't climb out of. My family came out of this pit. My parents would be considered lower-middle classed now, socially, but very rich in other aspects of life.

Now, if you look at my own family's income you would say that we are living on the edge of poverty. But if you saw our home, (a comfortable remodeled farmhouse) the clothes we wear, our education level and the way our children are turning out to be law-abiding productive citizens, you would call us good and regular American folks. We don't have a lot of money floating around. I would love to have a nice new 12 seated van for our family car. Instead I drive a beat up '77 Chevy Suburban, for now.

If you remember me from before I have 9 children, going on 10. Our adopted daughter's baby brother may be coming to be a part of our family soon. I have chosen to invest my time in my family for 22 years, and even though living on one income has taken a lot of creativity, I have never felt that I am lower-classed. I actually have saved a lot of money by eliminating day-care and by garage-sales and thrift-storing it for clothes and such.

Maybe these generalizations that sociologists use are good in the context that as a general rule our societies tend to determine the outcome of it's people. But I find that some of the studies are actually depressing to me. I am a very optimistic person. I believe that I learned this from my mother. No matter how bad a situation may look, there is always room for change and growth. I do not have to accept that I will never have the means by which to pull my family up to a more comfortable level of living. However, I do not feel that I have a wretched existence, I believe that anyone who lives in America can succeed by whatever standard they consider success to be.

I read a little analogy once that would explain this thought. There was a millionaire on vacation who met up with a humble fisherman. The millionaire said to the fisherman, "You should expand your business, buy another boat and hire some workers." The fisherman couldn't understand why this would benefit him. The millionaire said that he could keep expanding until he was rich. The Fisherman wondered why he would want to be rich. The rich man answered. So you can take vacations with your family to a nice quite spot and go fishing. (go figure) I don't think it is a bad thing to accept what life has to offer without having serious misgivings for the things we do not have. Everyone has a need to find peace with their existence.

Besides that, history has proven that people do not always live up to bad expectations. Even a child of a drug-addict can be successful and turn his/her life situation into something positive through a deeper understanding of others. Maybe all of these notions are too individualistic to be considered sociological. Maybe they are under the category of Psychology instead. (?)

Pamela